Follow TNM’s WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
The Madras High Court’s division bench on Tuesday, January 21, reserved its verdict on a petition filed by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) challenging an earlier order that directed the board to grant a U/A 16+ certificate to the film Jana Nayagan.
The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan, decided to reserve orders after hearing arguments from Solicitor General ARL Sundaresan, appearing for the CBFC, and senior counsel Sathish Parasaran, representing KVN Productions.
According to the CBFC’s petition, the production company was informed on January 5 that the film had not been certified and had instead been referred to the Revising Committee. Subsequently, the producers approached the court seeking certification, following which a single judge stayed the CBFC’s decision to send the film to the Revising Committee.
The CBFC argued that the authority to grant certification lies solely with the Chairperson of the Board and that the Revising Committee only assists the CBFC in the decision-making process. It was contended that the production house had approached the court while the certification process was still incomplete.
On the other hand, KVN Productions submitted that it had applied for certification on December 18 and resubmitted the film on December 24 after complying with the examining committee’s suggestions to modify scenes involving violence and gore. However, the process allegedly came to a halt on December 29 following a complaint by one of the five committee members regarding the absence of an armed forces expert during the screening.
The producers further stated that on January 5, they were informed that the film had been referred to a nine-member Revising Committee due to alleged complaints about hurting religious sentiments and the Indian Armed Forces. They argued that it was unjustifiable for a committee member to raise such objections four days later, especially when the film was scheduled for release on January 9.
During the hearing, the judges questioned the production company for announcing a release date before receiving certification. In response, the producers justified their action, stating that no such prohibition exists and cited similar practices followed in the Hindi film industry.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the bench reserved its verdict without specifying a date for pronouncement.